«

»

Sep
20

Top Hat Theory

It happens all the time. Maybe you are sitting in your apartment nursing a hangover. You’re taking fluids, maybe loading up some videogame or a Netflix show. And then it happens. Some fucking prick riding his loud motor cycle guns it down your street. Or maybe it’s some douche bag in his 0% down car all fixed up so that the thing is actually louder and more obnoxious than it otherwise would have been. And then you ask yourself, how the fuck does this happen? What is it that leads some mentally deficient person to spend money they don’t have on something like an intentionally loud vehicle that just pisses everyone off? How do these people exist? Why?

The answer is expressed in “Top Hat Theory.”

Top Hat Theory teaches us that male behaviors and their trends are directly attributable to the perception that adopting a behavior will help one get laid. So we re-ask the question, why does some douche ride a loud motor cycle? The answer is, “because some chick chose to fuck a guy a like that once and other women continue to do so, ergo he has chosen this style of behavior in the hopes that it will increase the probability of coitus.” Why women choose to reward this type of behavior or at least not explicitly punish it doesn’t concern us in Top Hat Theory. Instead we are more interested in the results of their choices.

Let’s run through an example. A guy gets laid. And the cause of him getting laid is associated with some type of behavior. Maybe he’s wearing aviator sunglasses. Other guys realize that guy got laid, and they also deduce that his getting laid was associated with his wearing aviator sunglasses, because the little chicky thought they were “oh my god so cool can I try them on?!” So, the guy that didn’t get laid goes and buys some aviator sunglasses to improve his odds. And the process repeats. The next thing you know every douche on the boardwalk is wearing aviator sunglasses…until some guy decides to experiment with 80’s sunglasses. Maybe his experiment ends after a period of involuntary celibacy. Or perhaps, maybe even by pure chance, he gets laid. Others identify the connection with 80’s sunglasses. And BOOM! We experience Schumpeterian Creative Destruction. Now 80’s sunglasses start flying off the shelves as aviators disappear and early adopters of the new 80’s sunglasses douche-play reap all the benefits, until the last halfwit gets duped into paying a huge price for 80’s shades that no longer score social points, because it is too common.

Top Hat Theory is similar to Chaos Theory in the sense that one little seemingly random event occurs, and it snowballs into something much bigger the end result of which could be quite different than what started it. In Chaos Theory the example of the butterfly is often given. A butterfly in the Sahara Desert flaps its wing. The chain of air molecules bumping into each other causes subsequent perturbations – they bump into the next molecule and the next molecule bumps into the next one etc, throwing everything out of its previous trajectory possibly causing the marginal change in the direction of a breeze which then goes on to cause the creation of a storm, which then goes on to become a hurricane, which then floods New Orleans, which then leads to a humanitarian disaster, which then leads to a  growth in government, which then leads to tyranny, which then leads to global government which then leads to the enslavement of virtually the entire human population by a global elite etc. Through cause and effect and the marginal impact of some occurrence a series of events happened. Styles don’t just change. They evolve. One decision to wear an earring in the 60’s snowballs through various innovations into the hipster culture of today – with all perturbations scaled to their association with getting laid.

Now it must be stressed that the trend need not cause getting laid. Rather the stylistic trend need only be associated with carnal success – though it is necessary that it be interpreted by others as the cause of success such that someone somewhere goes on to adopt the behavior.

For example, these guys riding the loud motor cycles might be getting laid because of other characteristics they have. One guy is tall, another one is rich etc but they both ride loud bikes because they enjoy being a pest to other people. But because they get laid some man somewhere identifies the cause as their having loud motor cycles (as opposed to being separately tall, rich or whatever) and this observer goes on to mimic the motor cycle behavior with the intent that he too will get laid because of the association he has observed. So, we can see that odd behaviors can emerge from randomness but persist because they are not explicitly unrewarded. If all women collectively somehow agreed to not sleep with douche bags on loud motor cycles (even if they are tall or rich etc) there would be nobody on loud motor cycles.

Behaviors exist because the adoption of them does not lead to not getting laid. If a behavior led to explicitly not getting laid, it would disappear. For example, being an intelligent, forward thinking, non-douche young man will guarantee that you do not get laid. Ergo, that behavior disappears and virtually all young men become douche bags. Adopting some form of douchery is what is sexually rewarded, so they must do it – however much they protest against it and hate themselves. The value of getting laid is just too important.

Let us summarize the classes of behavior in the context of examples that have appeared in this essay:

Aviator sunglasses – a behavior appears to be causal and actually is causal to getting laid. The behavior spreads rapidly and declines quickly as competing males adopt it and it loses value as a result. The style evolves quickly as competing males experiment with derivatives of the original successful behavior.

Loud motor cycle – a behavior is presumed to be causal to getting laid, but is not actually causal to that outcome. The behavior persists and remains for a much longer period. There is no stylistic innovation, because adopters of the behavior cannot delineate what features lead to success and what features does not. Their success and failures are actually the result of some other variable.

Intelligent non-douche bag – the behavior is explicitly punished in that the adopter of this behavior will never get laid. The behavior is abandoned or the adopter endures involuntary celibacy.

Top Hat Theory is the concept that the causal or non-causal association of a behavior with sexual success will lead to its proliferation. Indeed the very name of Top Hat Theory also highlights the understanding that this behavior can be utterly ridiculous and even have no causal relation to getting laid. If men believed that wearing a top hat was supportive of their getting laid, we could bring back the top hat. We could pay some women to publicly direct their attention to men with top hats for a period of time. Other men would see multiple instances of the association between top hats and women and become conditioned to the connection. Soon these men would don top hats for obvious intentions. As long as they remained faithful to the potential potency of the top hat, it would persist.